Monday, 30 September 2024

UT0 UT1 UT2 UT3

It is common knowledge that the King Fuʾād Edition of the Ḥafṣ qirāʾa was an immediate success in the Muslim world. common knowledge, but not true. Orien­t­alists bought it, but hardly an Egyp­tian because with almost 850 big pages it is too bulky ‒ they pre­fered the edition written by Muṣṭafā Naẓīf Qadir­ġalī on 522 pages. Because the govern­ment pushed the new ortho­graphy, adapta­tions of the old muṣḥaf with 15 lines on 522 pages but with the new ortho­graphy were published. Later Shamarly paid Muḥammad Saʿd Ibrāhīm al-Ḥaddād to copy the MNQ line by line but in the new ortho­graphy and had it printed in dif­ferent sizes and with different covers. In the Sixties the Govern­ment produced a type set muṣḥaf on 525 pages. So, althought the King Fuʾād Edition was not a best­seller, its ortho­graphy was estab­lished in Egypt by 1975.
But for the Andalu­sian ortho­graphy of Ḥafṣ to con­quer the Arab world, the genius of a scribe and some oil money were needed. ʿUṯmān Ṭaha had learned calli­graphy in Aleppo and Istan­bul, were Hamid Aytaç / Ḥāmid al-Āmidī taught him.
He works precisely, not artistically, he follows the lead of the KFE by using stacked forms (earlier letters above later ones) only if and when the vowel signs can be places exactly above or below its seat, and each letter being always the same ‒ swash forms of rāʾ, zai, kāf, elon­gated nūn and end yāʾ being the exception.
He copied the qurʾānic text (not the taʿrīf) of the KFE of 1952 (i.e. the Moroccan text of al-Ḥusainī al-Ḥaddād al-Mālikī with the modi­fica­tions (esp. pause signs) by ʿAlī Muḥammad aḍ-Ḍabbāʿ) with even less stacked forms
on 604 pages as made common by Haǧǧ Ḥāfiẓ ʿUṯmān Ḫalīfa QayišZāde an-Nūrī al-Bur­durī (d. 1894) (each ǧuz ‒ except the last because of the many sura title boxes ‒ on twenty pages, all verses ending in the bottom left corner includ­ing 2:282) ‒ this tem­plate is called ber kenar/one edge in Turkish and maḫtūm in Arabic.
Although his manu­script got several seals of being with­out mis­takes (see above), it had five minor mis­takes; a part from them it is a faith­ful repro­duction of the KFE of 1952 with all its features (notab­ly pause signs).
I call all versions that have one to five of these mis­takes "ʿŪṯmān Ṭaha 0" (UT0) to mark the dif­ference to the Madina prints in which these mis­takes are corrected. As Muḥammad Hozien has pointed out, there are three dif­ferent styles printed by the KFC. I call them UT1, UT2 and UT3
But first UT0, the versions with scribal errors. On page 11 there is no error. I include it only because UT0 follows the KFE, but Madina (KFC) changes the writing: putting the hamza on a small alif a practice common in Tunisian manus­cripts and prints of Qālūn.
on the next page a fatha WAS missing, the editor added it above the mīm; it is dif­ferent from the ones written by UT himself:
on the next page we have هٰذان instead of هٰذٰن :
here a sukūn/ǧazm is missing on a final he
here at the end of the second but last line there is a lazim sign (م) that shoudn't be there
The Istanbul Çağrı publisher publishes many translations with UT0 next to the translation, till today with only one of the mistakes corrected.
on the bottom of the next page the missing sukūn was added:
Here the big alif is replace by a dagger, but one sees the larger than necessry space.




In the time before Medina/UT1 there is even a UT0 from Suʿudia: the World Association of Muslim Youth in ar-Riʾāḍ published it, likely printed in Damascus by a publisher who have made one before. The WAMY-version has most of the mistakes
on the next two pages I compare UTo with UT1:
in the titel boxes most information is gone
the numbers (1 to 114) ‒ both in the page header and in the title boxes ‒ are gone
the pause لا signs are gone:
the last mistake, the mīm/lazim that should not be there:

No comments:

Post a Comment

KFE <--> kfe

While IDEO held a conference on "100 years" of the "Cairo Edition" without having a single copy -- either of the 1924 ed...